Hostname: page-component-6dbcb7884d-lhnfz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-14T08:56:11.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new species of Hyattechinus (Echinoidea) from the type Devonian of the United Kingdom and implications for the distribution of Devonian proterocidarid echinoids

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2018

JEFFREY R. THOMPSON Open the ORCID record for JEFFREY R. THOMPSON [Opens in a new window]  and
TIMOTHY A. M. EWIN
JEFFREY R. THOMPSON*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Zumberge Hall of Science, University of Southern California, 3651 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, California, USA90089-0740
TIMOTHY A. M. EWIN
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, South Kensington, London, SW7 5BD, UK
*
†Author for correspondence: thompsjr@usc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many of the most diverse clades of Late Palaeozoic echinoids (sea urchins) originated in the Devonian period. Our understanding of diversity dynamics of these Late Palaeozoic clades are thus informed by new systematic descriptions of some of their earliest members. The Proterocidaridae are a diverse and morphologically distinct clade of stem group echinoids with flattened tests and enlarged adoral pore pairs, which are first known from the Upper Devonian. We herein report on a new species of Hyattechinus, Hyattechinus anglicus n. sp., from the Upper Devonian of the North Devon Basin, Devon, UK. This is the first Devonian Hyattechinus known from outside of the Appalachian Basin, USA, and provides novel information regarding the palaeogeographic and stratigraphic distribution of proterocidarids in Late Devonian times. We additionally update the stratigraphic distribution of Devonian Hyattechinus from the Appalachian Basin, following recent biostratigraphic resolution of their occurrences. Hyattechinus appears to have been present in the Rheic echinoderm fauna during Late Devonian times, and comparison of the palaeoenvironmental setting of Hyattechinus anglicus with that of other Hyattechinus from the Famennian of the Appalachian Basin suggests that the genus may have preferred siliciclastic settings. Furthermore, this new taxon increases the diversity of echinoids from the Upper Devonian of Devon to three species.

Keywords

sea urchinFamennianDevonbiogeographyechinoderm
Type
Original Article
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 156 , Issue 5 , May 2019 , pp. 801 - 810
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Austin, T. 1860. On a new genus of echinoderm, and observations on the genus Palaechinus. The Geologist 3, 446–8.Google Scholar
Baird, G. C., Gryta, G. C. J. J., McKenzie, S. C., Over, J. D., Pulawski, S. & Sullivan, J. S. 2009. Deconvoluting the end-Devonian story in the “Oil Lands Region” of northwest Pennsylvania. Guidebook, 74ᵗʰ annual field conference of Pennsylvanian Geologit, Titusville, PA. In History and Geology of the Oil Regions of Northwestern Pennsylvania (ed. J. A. Harper), pp. 5–31.Google Scholar
Becker, R. T., Gradstein, F. M. & Hammer, O. 2012. The Devonian Period. In The Geologic Time Scale 2012 (eds Gradstein, F. M., Ogg, J. G., Schmitz, M. & Ogg, G.), pp. 559–601. Amsterdam, Boston: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Belanski, C. H. 1928. Descriptions of some typical fossils of the Shellrock stage. American Midland Naturalist 11 (5), 171–212.Google Scholar
Dehm, R. 1961. Ein zweiter Seeigel, Porechinus porosus nov. gen. nov. spec., aus dem rheinischen Unter-Devon. Mitteilungen der Bayerischen Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und Historische Geologie 1, 1–8.Google Scholar
de Koninck, L.-G. 1882. Notice sur un échinoïde gigantesque de calcaire carbonifère de Belgique Association française pour l'Avancement des Sciences, Compte Rendu de la 10ᵉ Session, Alger, 514–5.Google Scholar
Donovan, S. K. & Fearnhead, F. E. 2014. The British Devonian Crinoidea: Part 1, Introduction and Camerata. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society 168 (643), 55 pp.Google Scholar
Donovan, S., Fearnhead, F. E. & de Winter, A. J. T. 2017. Two rare taxa from the type area of the Devonian, south-west England. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 128, 675–8.Google Scholar
Goldring, R. 1955. The Upper Devonian and Lower Carboniferous trilobites of the Pilton Beds in N/Devon with an appendix on goniatites of the Pilton Beds. Senckenbergiana lethaea 36, 402–12.Google Scholar
Goldring, R. 1957. The last toothed Productellinae in Europe (Brachiopoda, Upper Devonian). Paläontological Zoology 31, 207–28.Google Scholar
Goldring, R. 1970. The stratigraphy about the Devonian–Carboniferous boundary in the Barnstaple area of North Devon, England. Comptes Rendus de la 6’eme Congrés Internationale de la Stratigraphie Géologique de la Carbonifère (Sheffield, 1967) 2, 807–16.Google Scholar
Golonka, J. & Gawęda, A. 2012. Plate tectonic evolution of the southern Margin of Laurussia in the Paleozoic. In Tectonics–Recent Advances (ed. Sharkov, E.). Rijeka: InTech.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1868. Note on the genus Palaeaster, with descriptions of some new species, and observations upon those previously described. In Twentieth Annual Report of the Regents of the University of the State or New-York, on the condition of the State Cabinet of Natural History, and the Historical and Antiquarian Collection Annexed Thereto, 282–303.Google Scholar
Hawkins, H. L. 1935. Two genera of Carboniferous Echinoidea (Lepidocidaris and Hyattechinus) new to Britain. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 91, 239–49.Google Scholar
Holder, M. T. & Leveridge, B. E. 1986. Correlation of the Rhenohercynian Variscides. Journal of the Geological Society, London 143, 141–7.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. T. 1912. Phylogeny of the Echini: With a Revision of Palaeozoic Species. Boston: The Boston Society of Natural History.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. T. 1929. Palaeozoic Echini of Belgium. Mémoires du Musée Royal D'Histoire Naturelle de Belgique 38, 1–74.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. & Ausich, W. I. 1987. Aerosol suspension feeding and current velocities: distributional controls for late Osagean crinoids. Paleobiology 13, 379–95.Google Scholar
Kent, D. V. 1985. Paleocontinental setting for the Catskill Delta. In The Catskill Delta (eds Woodrow, D. L. & Sevon, W. D.), pp. 9–14. Boulder, Colorado: The Geological Society of America.Google Scholar
Kier, P. M. 1965. Evolutionary trends in Paleozoic echinoids. Journal of Paleontology 39, 436–65.Google Scholar
Lambert, J. 1936. Sur quelques nouveaux échinides fossiles d’Égypte. Bulletin de l'Institute d’Égypte 18, 39–43.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G., Maples, C. G. & Waters, J. A. 2001. Revision of Late Devonian (Famennian) and some Early Carboniferous (Tournaisian) crinoids and blastoids from the type Devonian area of North Devon. Palaeontology 44, 1043–80.Google Scholar
Leske, N. G. 1778. Iacobi Theodori Klein Naturalis disposito Echinodermatum, Edita et aucta a N. G. Leske. Leipzig: G. E. Beer.Google Scholar
Leveridge, B. E. & Hartley, A. J. 2006. The Variscan Orogeny: the development and deformation of Devonian/Carboniferous basins in SW England and South Wales. In The Geology of England and Wales (eds Brenchley, P. J. & Rawson, P. F.), pp. 225–56. London, Bath: The Geological Society of London.Google Scholar
Leveridge, B. E. & Shail, R. K. 2011. The marine Devonian stratigraphy of Great Britain. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 122, 540–67.Google Scholar
M'Coy, F. 1849. On some new Palaeozoic Echinodermata. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 2 2, 244–54.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. & Worthen, A. H. 1869. Descriptions of new crinoidea and echinoidea, from the Carboniferous rocks of the Western States, with a note on the genus Onychaster. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 21, 67–83.Google Scholar
Neumayr, M. 1881. Morphologische Studien über fossile Echinodermen. Sitzungsberichte der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Classe der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften 84 (1), 143–76.Google Scholar
Prentice, J. E. 1960. Dinantian, Namurian and Westphalian rocks of the district south-west of Barnstaple, north Devon. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 115, 261–89.Google Scholar
Reich, M. & Smith, A. B. 2009. Origins and biomechanical evolution of teeth in echinoids and their relatives. Palaeontology 52, 1149–68.Google Scholar
Shail, R. K. & Leveridge, B. E. 2009. The Rhenohercynian passive margin of SW England: development, inversion and extensional reactivation. Comptes Rendus Geoscience 341, 140–55.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. 1984. Echinoid Palaeobiology. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. O. 1921. Echinoderms of the Iowa Devonian. Iowa Geological Survey Annual Report 29, 385–552.Google Scholar
Thompson, J. R. & Ausich, W. I. 2016. Facies distribution and taphonomy of echinoids from the Fort Payne Formation (late Osagean, early Viséan, Mississippian) of Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology 90, 239–49.Google Scholar
Thompson, J. R. & Denayer, J. 2017. Revision of echinoids from the Tournaisian (Mississippian) of Belgium and the importance of disarticulated material in assessing palaeodiversity. Geological Journal 52, 529–38.Google Scholar
Waters, C. N., Waters, R. A., Barclay, W. J. & Davies, J. R. 2009. A Lithostratigraphical Framework for the Carboniferous Successions of Southern Great Britain (Onshore). British Geological Survey Research Report. Nottingham: British Geological Survey, 185 pp.Google Scholar
Waters, J. A. & Webster, G. D. 2009. A re-evaluation of Famennian echinoderm diversity: implications for patterns of extinction and rebound in the Late Devonian. In Devonian Change: Case Studies in Palaeogeography and Palaeoecology (ed. Königshof, P.), pp. 149–61. London: The Geological Society of London.Google Scholar
Whidborne, G. F. 1896. A preliminary synopsis of the faunas of the Pickwell Down, Baggy, and Pilton Beds. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 14, 371–7.Google Scholar
Whidborne, G. F. 1898. A monograph of the Devonian fauna of South West England. Pt. III. The fauna of the Marwood and Pilton Beds of North Devon and Somerset (continued). Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society 48 (3), 179–236.Google Scholar
Whittaker, A. & Leveridge, B. E. 2011. The North Devon Basin: a Devonian passive margin shelf succession. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 122, 718–44.Google Scholar
Woodrow, D. L. 1985. Paleogeography, paleoclimate, and sedimentary processes of the Late Devonian Catskill Delta. In The Catskill Delta (eds Woodrow, D. L. & Sevon, W. D.), pp. 51–64. Boulder, Colorado: The Geological Society of America.Google Scholar